Do you 100% match the Reinin dichotomies for your type?

[Not A Communist Shill]

?

[Beautiful sky]

Yes.

In the strategic vrs tactical thread I explained how that works in me.

[xerx]

I changed myself to match my reinin dichotomies. a commonality in the study of typology.

[The Exception]

Highlighting the ones that fit me.


Static / Dynamic
Consistent with LII and EII

Yielding / Obstinate
Consistent with EII

Aristocratic / Democratic
Not sure. I used to think democratic but I think alot in terms of groups and group affiliation.
EII is aristocratic and LII is democratic

Tactical / Strategic
Consistent with LII and EII

Constructivist / Emotivist
Consistent with EII. I'm not sure of this preference though. Somewhere close to the middle, perhaps a little more constructivist?

Carefree / Farsighted
Consistent with EII and LII

Merry / Serious (also called Subjectivist / Objectivist)
Consistent with LII

Judicious / Decisive (also called Reasonable / Resolute)
Consistent with LII and EII

Positivist / Negativist
Not sure. I think about things that are missing alot but I tend to phrase it more like a positivist.
EII is positivist and LII is negativist

Right / Left (also called Process / Result or Evolutory / Involutory)
Consistent with LII

Asking / Declaring (sometimes called Questim / Declatim or Interrogative / Declarative)
I used to think asking because I'm asking alot of questions but I ask them for the purpose of getting the answer rather than sake of just asking.
Consistent with EII

[Sol]

Reinin dichotomies is just unproved and baseless bullshit not related to Jung.

To check are RD true is needed objective blind experiment, but not just subjective opinions. If someones thinks unclear bullshit is true, it does not mean it is. There many who mistype themselves and others, then change opinion about their type - that is more clear situation and we have there general match <50% between everyone. While RD is mess MUCH more.

[Sol]

Yes

No. Your behavior controverts even to Jung's dichotomies and aspects, not only to groundless fantasy like RD wich controverts between different typers and has no clear description at all.

[Beautiful sky]

No. Your behavior controverts even to Jung's dichotomies and aspects, not only to groundless fantasy like RD wich controverts between different typers and has no clear description at all.

Ok

Why do you take such interest in me. You can stop looking at my threads and my profile

[Suz]

?

My issue is that for many of the dichotomies, i can resonate with both (and also they can be difficult to conceptualize because the terms arent necessarily literal). So I haven't really found most of the dichotomies useful for typing myself or others. Judicious/decisive and merry/serious are probably the ones i find more useful.

[nondescript]

Ok

Why do you take such interest in me. You can stop looking at my threads and my profile

Because you're what this forum revolves around .

[nondescript]

?

Oh, it's you sub. You sure do switch pics often. Anyhow, I'll list these with explanations:

Static - Dynamic: I am completely unsure about this one. This is a reinin I've wanted to crack open for quite some time by now. My writing and talking sure does leave a dynamic taste, but I am not sure if dynamic = dynamic(this is what happens when you let a bunch of alpha NTs develop something).

Positive - Negative: I am also unsure about this one. I've tried capturing it multiple times, but it's so fiddly, god dam!

Asking - Declaring: I do love to hear myself speak, but then I am not the one to prefer the shotgun approach to basically anything. With that said, I feel like I prefer dialogues.

Tactical - Strategic: This is very hard to determine. On one hand, I feel free if I am just free to choose what to do and how to do it without any real goal. Otoh, I severely dislike minecraft and such things. I very much need a goal. With that said, I feel like I prefer tactics.

Constructive - Emotive: This one is easy. I very much like returning to things that actually left positive impression on me(and equally avoid things that left the negative one). When I actually acquire an emotional state, it lasts long and you can count on it. I also put more stress on what has been said. All constr things.

Process - Result: This one was tricky but I simply don't have the willpower to do a whole thing in one sitting. I very much prefer to break it down into multiple runs so to speak. I thought for a long time I was actually on the side of process, but I simply am not.

Yielding - Obstinate: A tricky one to be sure. I feel like I could be on the yielding side, but then again I can be very stubborn. But about the core of this dichotomy, no I won't pursue something if resources are inadequate. I simply won't. That's why I think yielding fits me better.

Carefree - Farsighted: Again, I feel like I could be more on the FS side. I am simply not willing(as in "no way jose") to discard prior experience, but I don't completely focus on predicting everything either. Because you really can't predict everything even with a help of a modern Supercomputer("Infinite diversity in infinite combinations", right ?).

Subjective - Objective: Hell, I don't believe that an objective thought can really exist. Maybe it can, who knows? Anyhow, I constantly use the term "fun", I shift the perspectives of situations(otoh, but then again etc) etc. It wasn't difficult at all to determine this one.

Reasonable - Decisive: Well, that wasn't so bad, was it? I am in no rush, I like to take my time with decisions, love just, well not doing nothing, but rather doing comfortable things etc. Easy.

Aristocratic - Democratic: Everyone is an individual, first and foremost. No matter how I call him, he is a person and I treat him as such. I hate bad, evil, malignant dumbfucks, not all dumbfucks(there are goofy dumbfucks or pensive dumbfucks, why would I hate such?). And everyone should be treated according to his traits first. But I DO think that when it comes to positions, only the best people should be placed in those. Who knows, maybe I am aristo after all. Kinda doubt it, but still...

Now, let's see to which types do most of these lead: x / total sure of = y% (x / total RD = z%) {alternative based upon Aristo} - reinins used are the bolded above + SFj(10 in total).

ESI: 8 / 10 = 80% ( 8 / 15 = 53,3% ) { 70% , 46,6% }
ESE: 8 / 10 = 80% ( 8 / 15 = 53,3% ) { 70% , 46,6% }
SLE: 5 / 10 = 50% ( 5 / 15 = 33% ) { 60% , 40% }
EIE: 5 / 10 = 50% ( 5 / 15 = 33% ) { 60% , 40% }
SEE: 5 / 10 = 50% ( 33% ) { 40% , 26,6% }
SEI: 6 / 10 = 60% ( 6 / 15 = 40% ) { 50% , 33% }
LSI: 4 / 10 = 40% ( 4 / 15 = 26,6% ) { 50% , 33%}
IEI: 7 / 10 = 70% ( 7 / 15 = 46,6% ) {depending upon SINGLE dichotomy(Aristo), this one could emerge at the top! - 80% , 53,3% }
IEE: 5 / 10 = 50% ( 33% ) { 60% , 40% }
EII: 6 / 10 = 60% ( 40% ) { 70% , 46,6% }
LSE: 6 / 10 = 60% ( 40% ) { 70% , 46,6% }
SLI: 5 / 10 = 50% ( 33% ) { 60% , 40% }
LIE: 4 / 10 = 40% ( 26,6% ) { 30% , 20% }
ILI: 4 / 10 = 40% ( 26,6% ) { 30% , 20% }
ILE: 7 / 10 = 70% ( 46,6% ) { 60% , 40% }
LII: 6 / 10 = 60% ( 40% ) { 50% , 33% }

Order:

ESI = ESE > IEI = ILE > SEI = EII = LSE = LII > SLE = EIE = SEE = IEE = SLI > LSI = ILI = LIE

Alternate Order:

IEI > ESI = ESE = EII = LSE > SLE = EIE = IEE = SLI = ILE > SEI = LSI = LII > SEE > ILI = LIE


Make of that what you will, but some inferences can be made:

1. F types are very strong. Especially ESI, ESE and IEI.
2. ILI and LIE are dead to me(constantly last).
3. Quadra strengths are as follow: Alpha >> Delta > Gamma ~ Beta (alt: Delta > Beta > Alpha >> Gamma) { average: Alpha > Delta > Beta >> Gamma }

[nondescript]

Just to follow up this with a relevant post:

If we, otoh, take just the RDs instead of RDs + SFj, we get this:

ESI = 5 / 7 = 71,5%
ESE = 6 / 7 = 85,7%
IEI = 4 / 7 = 57%
ILE = 6 / 7 = 85,7%
SEI = 3 / 7 = 43%
EII = 2 / 7 = 28,5%
LSE = 3 / 7 = 43%
LII = 5 / 7 = 71,5%
SLE = 3 / 7 = 43%
EIE = 3 / 7 = 43%
SEE = 2 / 7 = 28,5%
IEE = 3 / 7 = 43%
SLI = 4 / 7 = 57%
LSI = 2 / 7 = 28,5%
ILI = 3 / 7 = 43%
LIE = 2 / 7 = 28,5%

Alt:

ESI = 57%
SEE = 14,3% ( 1 / 7 )
ILI = 28,5%
LIE = 14,3%
ESE = 71,5%
SEI = 28,5%
ILE = 71,5%
LII = 57%
IEI = 71,5%
EIE = 57%
LSI = 43%
SLE = 57%
SLI = 71,5%
LSE = 57%
IEE = 57%
EII = 43%

ESE = ILE > ESI = LII > IEI = SLI > SEI = SLE = LSE = EIE = IEE = ILI > EII = SEE = LSI = LIE

Alt:

ESE = IEI = ILE = SLI > ESI = LII = EIE = SLE = LSE = IEE > LSI = EII > ILI = SEI > SEE = LIE

Inferences:

1. ESE clinging to the top like a drunk monkey
2. LIE is still dead
3. F types still going strong
4. Quadra strength: Alpha >>> Beta = Gamma = Delta ( alt: Alpha > Delta > Beta >> Gamma ) { average: Alpha > Delta ~ Beta > Gamma }

ULTIMATELY:

Don't use Reinins for typing, rather for suggestions.

[Emmym]

No. I feel more decisive than judicious (I can mobilize easily to do stuff I have experience with compared to other judicious peeps, esp irrationals), more negativist than positivist (I complain so much) and more asking than declaring. The last is probably solely because an IEI once pointed out how often I will revive the topic we were talking about before being interrupted and how annoying that is (I'm sorry!! lmao) and I think that was mentioned in the article for "asking vs declaring."

[glam]

i'm tempted to say that the IEI dichotomies all pretty much fit me, based on these descriptions. none of them make me say outright "no, that's not me." (whether this is because the descriptions are actually accurate, or because they can apply to a broad spectrum of people regardless of socionics, idk ) i remember years ago the only info i had read on Reinins were from sparse descriptions on Wikisocion that didn't seem very descriptive or accurate, so i didn't pay much attention to them in the beginning. after reading more information about them, i started to see more how they fit with my type, and others.

i think the thing to remember with Reinin dichotomies is that theoretically, they're derived from the Jungian base and have been proven to "exist" according to the mathematics of the model. but whether all of these dichotomies have been named and described properly might be another matter? idk where things currently stand with socionics researchers, but i'm under the impression that "more research" might be useful to further flesh out the names and descriptions of the dichotomies.

very sure: Merry/Subjectivist, Decisive, Dynamic, Positivist, Asking, Emotivist, Yielding, Aristocratic
pretty sure: Result
probably: Tactical, Farsighted

i also tend to identify alright with IEI groupings that are derived from the Reinins, e.g. Vortical-Synergetic cognition (Result-Positivist-Dynamic)

[Not A Communist Shill]

bump

[consentingadult]

bump

I match 100% with the reinin dichotomies. Go figure, all the descriptions are Forer Effect....

[Aylen]

According to one particular test I don't match 100%. It also has me as an extrovert even though I don't know what specifically led to that conclusion. No one who knows me would mistake me for an extrovert.

The test was not bad but it wasn't great either. Not sure what "right/left means and I may be obstinate sometimes. I can be just as yielding so the questions asked are important. This test did't ask the right questions. It depends on the situation. I use both tactics and strategy in my approach to problems but I am not sure if that is what it actually means.



I guess they based this on the average "IEI" who answered. Not sure if they had a baseline to start with.